Condemnation (CC and Other Books)

Expressions researched:
"condemn" |"condemnable" |"condemnation" |"condemned" |"condemning" |"condemns"

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 2.117, Purport:

Imitation devotees, who wish to advertise themselves as elevated Vaiṣṇavas and who therefore imitate the previous ācāryas but do not follow them in principle, are condemned in the words of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (2.3.24) as stone-hearted. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has commented on their stone-hearted condition as follows: bahir aśru-pulakayoḥ sator api yad dhṛdayaṁ na vikriyeta tad aśma-sāram iti kaniṣṭhādhikāriṇām eva aśru-pulakādi-mattve ’pi aśma-sāra-hṛdayatayā nindaiṣā. "Those who shed tears by practice but whose hearts have not changed are to be known as stone-hearted devotees of the lowest grade. Their imitation crying, induced by artificial practice, is always condemned." The desired change of heart referred to above is visible in the reluctance to do anything not congenial to the devotional way. To create such a change of heart, conclusive discussion about Śrī Kṛṣṇa and His potencies is absolutely necessary. False devotees may think that simply shedding tears will lead one to the transcendental plane, even if one has not had a factual change in heart, but such a practice is useless if there is no transcendental realization. False devotees, lacking the conclusion of transcendental knowledge, think that artificially shedding tears will deliver them.

CC Adi 3.87, Purport:

The asuras, or demons, who think that anyone can become God, are condemned.

The authentic scriptures are compiled by personalities like Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Asita and Parāśara, who are not ordinary men. All the followers of the Vedic way of life have accepted these famous personalities, whose authentic scriptures conform to the Vedic literature. Nevertheless, the demoniac do not believe their statements, and they purposely oppose the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His devotees. Today it is fashionable for common men to write whimsical words as so-called incarnations of God and be accepted as authentic by other common men. This demoniac mentality is condemned in the Seventh Chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā, wherein it is said that those who are miscreants and the lowest of mankind, who are fools and asses, cannot accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead because of their demoniac nature. They are compared to ulūkas, or owls, who cannot open their eyes in the sunlight. Because they cannot bear the sunlight, they hide themselves from it and never see it. They cannot believe that there is such illumination.

CC Adi 4.66, Purport:

This text from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (4.3.23), spoken by Lord Śiva when he condemned Dakṣa, the father of Satī, as an opponent of Viṣṇu, confirms beyond a doubt that Lord Kṛṣṇa, His name, His fame, His qualities and everything in connection with His paraphernalia exist in the sandhinī-śakti of the Lord's internal potency.

CC Adi 4.203, Translation:

"The lotus-eyed Rādhārāṇī powerfully condemned the ecstatic love that caused a flow of tears that hindered Her sight of Govinda."

CC Adi 5.226, Purport:

The Padma Purāṇa specifically mentions that anyone who thinks the form of the Lord in the temple to be made of wood, stone or metal is certainly in a hellish condition. Impersonalists are against the worship of the Lord's form in the temple, and there is even a group of people who pass as Hindus but condemn such worship. Their so-called acceptance of the Vedas has no meaning, for all the ācāryas, even the impersonalist Śaṅkarācārya, have recommended the worship of the transcendental form of the Lord. Impersonalists like Śaṅkarācārya recommend the worship of five forms, known as pañcopāsanā, which include Lord Viṣṇu. Vaiṣṇavas, however, worship the forms of Lord Viṣṇu in His varied manifestations, such as Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa, Lakṣmī-Nārāyaṇa, Sītā-Rāma and Rukmiṇī-Kṛṣṇa. Māyāvādīs admit that worship of the Lord's form is required in the beginning, but they think that in the end everything is impersonal. Therefore, since they are ultimately against worship of the Lord's form, Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has described them as offenders.

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam has condemned those who think the body to be the self as bhauma ijya-dhīḥ. Bhauma means earth, and ijya-dhīḥ means worshiper. There are two kinds of bhauma ijya-dhīḥ: those who worship the land of their birth, such as nationalists, who make many sacrifices for the motherland, and those who condemn the worship of the form of the Lord. One should not worship the planet earth or land of his birth, nor should one condemn the form of the Lord, which is manifested in metal or wood for our facility. Material things are also the energy of the Supreme Lord.

CC Adi 7.29-30, Purport:

They are so absorbed in impersonal thought that they take it for granted that all spiritual variety is material. Because they do not know anything beyond their misconception of the brahma-jyotir, they cannot understand that Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is spiritual and therefore beyond the conception of material illusion. Whenever Kṛṣṇa incarnates personally or as a devotee, these Māyāvādī philosophers accept Him as an ordinary human being. This is condemned in the Bhagavad-gītā (9.11):

avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam

paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto mama bhūta-maheśvaram

"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be."

CC Adi 7.45, Purport:

Before the time of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the suvarṇa-vaṇik class was condemned by Ballāl Sena, who was then the King of Bengal, due to a personal grudge. In Bengal the suvarṇa-vaṇik class are always very rich, for they are bankers and dealers in gold and silver. Therefore, Ballāl Sena used to borrow money from a suvarṇa-vaṇik banker. Ballāl Sena's bankruptcy later obliged the suvarṇa-vaṇik banker to stop advancing money to him, and thus Ballāl Sena became angry and condemned the entire suvarṇa-vaṇik society as belonging to the śūdra community. He tried to induce the brāhmaṇas not to accept the suvarṇa-vaṇiks as followers of the instructions of the Vedas under the brahminical directions, but although some brāhmaṇas approved of Ballāl Sena's actions, others did not. Thus the brāhmaṇas also became divided amongst themselves, and those who supported the suvarṇa-vaṇik class were rejected from the brāhmaṇa community. At the present day the same biases are still being followed.

CC Adi 7.64, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are always very puffed up because of their knowledge of Sanskrit and because they belong to the Śaṅkara-sampradāya. They are always under the impression that unless one is a brāhmaṇa and a very good Sanskrit scholar, especially in grammar, one cannot accept the renounced order of life or become a preacher. Māyāvādī sannyāsīs always misinterpret all the śāstras with their word jugglery and grammatical compositions, yet Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya himself condemned such jugglery of words in the verse prāpte sannihite kāle na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñ karaṇe. Ḍukṛñ refers to suffixes and prefixes in Sanskrit grammar. Śaṅkarācārya warned his disciples that if they concerned themselves only with the principles of grammar, not worshiping Govinda, they were fools who would never be saved. Yet in spite of Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya's instructions, foolish Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are always busy juggling words on the basis of strict Sanskrit grammar.

CC Adi 7.110, Purport:

"My dear wife, hear my explanations of how I have spread ignorance through Māyāvāda philosophy. Simply by hearing it, even an advanced scholar will fall down. In this philosophy, which is certainly very inauspicious for people in general, I have misrepresented the real meaning of the Vedas and recommended that one give up all activities in order to achieve freedom from karma. In this Māyāvāda philosophy I have described the jīvātmā and Paramātmā to be one and the same." How the Māyāvāda philosophy was condemned by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and His followers is described in Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Antya-līlā, Second Chapter, verses 94 through 99, where Svarūpa-dāmodara Gosvāmī says that anyone who is eager to understand the Māyāvāda philosophy must be considered insane. This especially applies to a Vaiṣṇava who reads the Śārīraka-bhāṣya and considers himself to be one with God. The Māyāvādī philosophers have presented their arguments in such attractive, flowery language that hearing Māyāvāda philosophy may sometimes change the mind of even a mahā-bhāgavata, or very advanced devotee. An actual Vaiṣṇava cannot tolerate any philosophy that claims God and the living being to be one and the same.

CC Adi 10.11, Purport:

This philosophy misleads people to atheism. One who has no idea what God actually is thinks that any form he imagines or any rascal he accepts can be God. This acceptance of cheap gods or incarnations of God is actually atheism. It is to be concluded, therefore, that those who worship demigods or self-proclaimed incarnations of God are all atheists. They have lost their knowledge, as confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.20): kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ prapadyante ’nya-devatāḥ. "Those whose minds are distorted by material desires surrender unto demigods." Unfortunately, those who do not cultivate Kṛṣṇa consciousness and do not properly understand the Vedic knowledge accept any rascal to be an incarnation of God, and they are of the opinion that one can become an incarnation simply by worshiping a demigod. This philosophical hodge-podge exists under the name of the Hindu religion, but the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement does not approve of it. Indeed, we strongly condemn it. Such worship of demigods and so-called incarnations of God should never be confused with the pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement.

CC Adi 13.69, Purport:

Just as a condemned person can be relieved by a special favor of the chief executive head, the president or king, so the condemned people of this Kali-yuga can be delivered only by the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself or a person especially empowered for this purpose. Śrīla Advaita Ācārya Prabhu desired that the Supreme Personality of Godhead advent Himself to deliver the fallen souls of this age.

CC Adi 14.50, Purport:

Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu disclosed this fact in His childhood. Out of ignorance, sometimes people worship the demigods to receive some particular boon, but actually, one who becomes a devotee and worshiper of the Supreme Personality of Godhead does not need to go to the demigods for any benediction because he obtains everything by the grace of the Supreme Lord. The Bhagavad-gītā (7.20, 28) therefore condemns such demigod worship:

kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ prapadyante ’nya-devatāḥ

taṁ taṁ niyamam āsthāya prakṛtyā niyatāḥ svayā

"Only persons whose intelligence is lost and who are mad with lusty desires worship the demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures."

CC Adi 14.50, Purport:

Sometimes we, the members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, are accused of not approving of the worship of demigods. But how can we approve of this when it is condemned by Lord Caitanya and Lord Kṛṣṇa? How can we allow people to become foolish and hṛta-jñāna (BG 7.20), bereft of intelligence? Our propaganda is simply meant to enable intelligent people to understand the distinction between matter and spirit and understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the whole spiritual identity. That is our mission. How could we mislead people into worshiping so-called gods in material bodies within this material world?

Our position of not allowing worship of the many hundreds of demigods was confirmed by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu even in His childhood. Śrīla Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura has sung in this connection:

anya devāśraya nāi tomāre kahinu bhāi

ei bhakti parama-kāraṇa

CC Adi 16.27, Translation:

Offering my obeisances to Śrīla Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura, I shall try to describe that portion of the Lord's analysis which, when he heard it, made the Digvijayī feel himself condemned.

CC Adi 17.52, Purport:

There are many tantric followers who, wishing to eat meat and drink wine, practice the black art of worshiping the goddess Bhavānī in a crematorium. Such fools also consider this bhavānī-pūjā to be as good as worship of Lord Kṛṣṇa in devotional service. But such abominable tantric activities performed by so-called svāmīs and yogīs are herein condemned by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He declares that such bhavānī-pūjā for drinking wine and eating meat quickly plunges one into hellish life. The method of worship itself is already hellish, and its results must also be hellish and nothing more.

CC Adi 17.166, Translation:

“Cow-killers are condemned to rot in hellish life for as many thousands of years as there are hairs on the body of the cow.

CC Adi 17.203, Purport:

On the contrary, these pāṣaṇḍīs say that we are spoiling the Hindu religion because people all over the world are accepting Lord Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead according to the version of Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. The pāṣaṇḍīs condemn this movement, and sometimes they accuse Vaiṣṇavas from foreign countries of being not bona fide. Even so-called Vaiṣṇavas—pseudo followers of the Vaiṣṇava cult—do not agree with our activities in making Vaiṣṇavas in the Western countries. Such pāṣaṇḍīs existed even during the time of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and they continue to exist. Despite all the activities of these pāṣaṇḍīs, however, the prediction of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu will triumph: pṛthivīte āche yata nagarādi grāma/ sarvatra pracāra haibe mora nāma. "In every town and village, the chanting of My name will be heard." (CB Antya-khaṇḍa 4.126) No one can check the spread of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement because upon this movement is the benediction of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.43, Purport:

The fifth Sandarbha is called Bhakti-sandarbha, and in this book there is a discussion of how devotional service can be directly executed, and how such service can be adjusted, either directly or indirectly. There is a discussion of the knowledge of all kinds of scripture, the establishment of the Vedic institution of varṇāśrama, bhakti as superior to fruitive activity, and so forth. It is also stated that without devotional service even a brāhmaṇa is condemned. There are discussions of the process of karma-tyāga (the giving of the results of karma to the Supreme Personality of Godhead), and the practices of mystic yoga and philosophical speculation, which are deprecated as simply hard labor. Worship of the demigods is discouraged, and worship of a Vaiṣṇava is considered exalted. No respect is given to the nondevotees. There are discussions of how one can be liberated even in this life (jīvan-mukta), Lord Śiva as a devotee, and how a bhakta and his devotional service are eternally existing.

CC Madhya 1.265, Translation:

After this, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu saved Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka, the younger brother of Rāmānanda Rāya, from being condemned to death by the King.

CC Madhya 2.35, Purport:

In the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, the word dainya (humility) is explained as follows: "When unhappiness, fearfulness and the sense of having offended combine, one feels condemned. This sense of condemnation is described as dīnatā, humility. When one is subjected to such humility, he feels physically inactive, he apologizes, and his consciousness is disturbed. His mind is also restless, and many other symptoms are visible." The word nirveda is also explained in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: “One may feel unhappiness and separation, as well as jealousy and lamentation, due to not discharging one's duties. The despondency that results is called nirveda. When one is captured by this despondency, thoughts, tears, loss of bodily luster, humility and heavy breathing result.” Viṣāda is also explained in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: "When one fails to achieve his desired goal of life and repents for all his offenses, there is a state of regret called viṣāda." The symptoms of avasāda are also explained: "One hankers to revive his original condition and inquires how to do so. There are also deep thought, heavy breathing, crying and lamentation, as well as a changing of the bodily color and drying up of the tongue."

CC Madhya 3.85, Purport:

There is always a difference of opinion between a smārta-brāhmaṇa and a Vaiṣṇava gosvāmī. There are even smārta opinions and Vaiṣṇava gosvāmī opinions available in astrological and astronomical calculations. By calling Nityānanda Prabhu a bhraṣṭa avadhūta (a rejected paramahaṁsa), Advaita Ācārya Prabhu in a sense accepted Nityānanda Prabhu as a paramahaṁsa. In other words, Nityānanda Prabhu had nothing to do with the rules governing smārta-brāhmaṇas. Thus under pretense of condemning Him, Advaita Ācārya was actually praising Him. In the avadhūta stage, the paramahaṁsa stage, which is the supermost stage, one may appear to be viṣayī, on the platform of sense gratification, but in actuality he has nothing to do with sense gratification. At that stage, a person sometimes accepts the symbols and dress of a sannyāsī and sometimes does not. Sometimes he dresses like a householder. We should know, however, that these are all joking words between Advaita Ācārya and Nityānanda Prabhu. They are not to be taken as insults.

CC Madhya 6.167, Purport:

Actually, at the present moment all systems of religion deny the worship of the form of the Lord due to ignorance of His transcendental form. The first-class materialists (the Māyāvādīs) imagine five specific forms of the Lord, but when they try to equate the worship of such imaginary forms with bhakti, they are immediately condemned. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.15), where He says, na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ. Bereft of real knowledge due to agnosticism, the Māyāvādī philosophers should not even be seen by the devotees of the Lord, nor touched, because those philosophers are liable to be punished by Yamarāja, the superintendent demigod who judges the activities of sinful men. The Māyāvādī agnostics wander within this universe in different species of life due to their nondevotional activities. Such living entities are subjected to the punishments of Yamarāja. Only the devotees, who are always engaged in the service of the Lord, are exempt from the jurisdiction of Yamarāja.

CC Madhya 6.199, Translation:

Upon hearing Caitanya Mahāprabhu's explanation of the ātmārāma verse, Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya was struck with wonder. He then understood Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu to be Kṛṣṇa in person, and he thus condemned himself in the following words.

CC Madhya 6.235, Purport:

The karmīs are fully under the bodily conception of life, and the jñānīs, although theoretically understanding that they are not the body, also have no information about the lotus feet of the Lord because they overly stress impersonalism. Consequently both karmīs and jñānīs are unfit for receiving the mercy of the Lord and becoming devotees. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura therefore says, karma-kāṇḍa jñāna-kāṇḍa, kevala viṣera bhāṇḍa: those who have taken to the process of karma-kāṇḍa (fruitive activity) and jñāna-kāṇḍa (speculation on the science of transcendence) have simply eaten from poisoned pots. They are condemned to remain in material existence life after life until they take shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. This is confirmed in Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā (7.19):

bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate

vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ

"After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare."

CC Madhya 9.263, Translation:

“In every revealed scripture there is condemnation of fruitive activities. It is advised everywhere to give up engagement in fruitive activities, for no one can attain the highest goal of life, love of Godhead, by executing them.

CC Madhya 9.263, Purport:

"Knowledge of self-realization, even though freed from all material affinity, does not look well if devoid of a conception of the Infallible (God). What, then, is the use of fruitive activities, which are naturally painful from the very beginning and transient by nature, if they are not utilized for the devotional service of the Lord?" This means that even knowledge, which is superior to fruitive activity, is not successful if it is devoid of devotional service. Therefore in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam—in the beginning, middle and end—karma-kāṇḍa and jñāna-kāṇḍa are condemned. For example, in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.1.2) it is said, dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo ’tra.

CC Madhya 9.279, Purport:

When the five Apsarās went to break Acyuta Ṛṣi's meditation, they were all chastised and cursed by the saint. As a result, the girls turned into crocodiles in a lake that came to be known as Pañcāpsarā. Lord Rāmacandra also visited this place. From Śrī Nārada Muni's narration, it is understood that when Arjuna went to visit the holy places, he learned about the condemnation of the five Apsarās. He delivered them from their abominable condition, and from that day the lake known as Pañcāpsarā became a place of pilgrimage.

CC Madhya 11.99, Purport:

Rascals propose that anyone can invent his own religious process, and this proposition is condemned herein. If one actually wants to become religious, he must take up the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra.

CC Madhya 11.176, Purport:

At the present moment we see that some of the members of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness are tending to leave their preaching activities in order to sit in a solitary place. This is not a very good sign. It is a fact that Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura has condemned this process for neophytes. He has even stated in a song, pratiṣṭhāra tare, nirjanera ghare, tava hari-nāma kevala kaitava: "Sitting in a solitary place intending to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra is considered a cheating process." This practice is not possible for neophytes at all. The neophyte devotee must act and work very laboriously under the direction of the spiritual master, and he must thus preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Only after maturing in devotion can he sit down in a solitary place to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra as Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself did.

CC Madhya 11.195, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu asked Nityānanda Prabhu to go to Bengal and preach, and He asked the Gosvāmīs, Rūpa and Sanātana, to go to Vṛndāvana and excavate the lost places of pilgrimage. In this case the Lord asked Haridāsa Ṭhākura to remain there at Jagannātha Purī and constantly chant the holy names of the Lord. Thus Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu gave different persons different orders, and consequently one should not try to imitate the behavior of Haridāsa Ṭhākura without being ordered by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu or His representative. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura condemns such imitations in this way:

duṣṭa mana! tumi kisera vaiṣṇava?

pratiṣṭhāra tare, nirjanera ghare,

tava hari-nāma kevala kaitava

"My dear mind, you are trying to imitate Haridāsa Ṭhākura and chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra in a secluded place, but you are not worth being called a Vaiṣṇava because what you want is cheap popularity and not the actual qualifications of Haridāsa Ṭhākura. If you try to imitate him you will fall down, for your neophyte position will cause you to think of women and money. Thus you will fall into the clutches of māyā, and your so-called chanting in a secluded place will bring about your downfall."

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

The philosophy of monism is an adjustment of the Buddhist philosophy of voidism. In a mock fight with Śrī Advaita Ācārya, Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu was refuting this type of monistic philosophy. Vaiṣṇavas certainly accept Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the ultimate "one," and that which is without Kṛṣṇa is called māyā, or that which has no existence. External māyā is exhibited in two phases—jīva-māyā, the living entities, and guṇa-māyā, the material world. In the material world there is prakṛti (material nature) and pradhāna (the ingredients of material nature). However, for one who becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious, the distinction between material and spiritual varieties does not exist. An advanced devotee like Prahlāda Mahārāja sees everything as one—Kṛṣṇa. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (7.4.37), kṛṣṇa-graha-gṛhītātmā na veda jagad īdṛśam. One who is in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness does not distinguish between things material and spiritual; he takes everything to be related to Kṛṣṇa and therefore spiritual. By advaya-jñāna-darśana, Śrīla Advaita Ācārya has glorified pure devotional service. Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu herein sarcastically condemns the philosophy of the impersonal monists and praises the correct nondual philosophy of Śrī Advaita Prabhu.

CC Madhya 13.182, Translation:

Upon seeing the King, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu condemned Himself, saying, "Oh, how pitiful it is that I have touched a person who is interested in mundane affairs!"

CC Madhya 15.180, Purport:

The almighty Personality of Godhead has three potencies—internal, external and marginal. The conditioned souls, who are condemned due to their forgetfulness of the Lord, are put under the control of the external potency when she creates the material world. The three modes of material nature keep the living entity in a constant state of fear (bhayaṁ dvitīyābhiniveśataḥ). The conditioned soul is always fearful due to being controlled by the external potency; therefore the conditioned soul should always pray to the almighty Lord to conquer the external potency (māyā) so that she will no longer manifest her powers, which bind all living entities, moving and inert. By praying in this way one will become eligible to remain constantly in the association of the Lord, thus fulfilling the mission of going back home, back to Godhead.

CC Madhya 15.260, Translation:

After returning to his home, Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya consulted with his wife, the mother of Ṣāṭhī. After personally condemning himself, he began to speak as follows.

CC Madhya 15.264, Purport:

Consequently such a person cannot be accepted as a husband. A wife should dedicate her life and everything to Kṛṣṇa for further advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If her husband abandons Kṛṣṇa consciousness and she gives up her connection with him, she follows in the footsteps of the dvija-patnīs, the wives of the brāhmaṇas who were engaged in performing sacrifices. The wife is not to be condemned for cutting off such a relationship. In this regard, Śrī Kṛṣṇa assures the dvija-patnīs in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.23.31–32):

patayo nābhyasūyeran pitṛ-bhrātṛ-sutādayaḥ

lokāś ca vo mayopetā devā apy anumanvate

na prītaye ’nurāgāya hy aṅga-saṅgo nṛṇām iha

tan mano mayi yuñjānā acirān mām avāpsyatha

"My dear dvija-patnīs, rest assured that your husbands will not neglect you on your return, nor will your brothers, sons or fathers refuse to accept you. Because you are My pure devotees, not only your relatives but also people in general, as well as the demigods, will be satisfied with you. Transcendental love for Me does not depend upon bodily connection, but anyone whose mind is always absorbed in Me will surely, very soon, come to Me for My eternal association."

CC Madhya 16.72, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs look on Viṣṇu and Vaiṣṇavas imperfectly due to their poor fund of knowledge, and this is condemned. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (11.2.46), the intermediate Vaiṣṇava is described as follows:

īśvare tad-adhīneṣu bāliśeṣu dviṣatsu ca

prema-maitrī-kṛpopekṣā yaḥ karoti sa madhyamaḥ

"The intermediate Vaiṣṇava has to love God, make friends with the devotees, instruct the innocent and reject jealous people. These are the four functions of the Vaiṣṇava in the intermediate stage."

CC Madhya 16.141, Translation:

"If you want My happiness, please return to Nīlācala. You will simply condemn Me if you say any more about this matter."

CC Madhya 16.281, Purport:

Sometimes materialists, forgetting the pastimes of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa-Balarāma, go to Vṛndāvana, accept the land's spiritual facilities and engage in material activity. This is against the teachings of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The prākṛta-sahajiyās proclaim themselves vraja-vāsīs or dhāma-vāsīs, but they are mainly engaged in sense gratification. Thus they become more and more implicated in the materialistic way of life. Those who are pure devotees in Kṛṣṇa consciousness condemn their activities. The eternal vraja-vāsīs like Svarūpa Dāmodara did not even come to Vṛndāvana-dhāma. Śrī Puṇḍarīka Vidyānidhi, Śrī Haridāsa Ṭhākura, Śrīvāsa Paṇḍita, Śivānanda Sena, Śrī Rāmānanda Rāya, Śrī Śikhi Māhiti, Śrī Mādhavīdevī and Śrī Gadādhara Paṇḍita Gosvāmī never visited Vṛndāvana-dhāma. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura points out that we have no authorized documents stating that these exalted personalities visited Vṛndāvana. Nonetheless, we find many nondevotees, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, prākṛta-sahajiyās, fruitive workers, mental speculators and many others with material motives going to Vṛndāvana to live.

CC Madhya 17.79, Translation:

“You have made me Your carrier Garuḍa, although I am no better than a condemned crow. Thus You are the independent Personality of Godhead, the original Lord.

CC Madhya 17.142, Purport:

Once the Catuḥsana Kumāras went to Vaikuṇṭha to visit Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but they were stopped from entering the palace at the seventh gate by two doorkeepers named Jaya and Vijaya. Due to their jealousy, Jaya and Vijaya would not allow the Kumāras entry, and consequently the Kumāras became angry and cursed Jaya and Vijaya, condemning them to take birth in a family of asuras in the material world. The omniscient Personality of Godhead could immediately understand the incident, and He came with His eternal consort, the goddess of fortune. The Catuḥsana Kumāras immediately offered their obeisances unto the Lord. Simply by seeing the Lord and smelling the aroma of tulasī and saffron from His lotus feet, the Kumāras became devotees and abandoned their long-cherished impersonalism. Thus the four Kumāras were turned into Vaiṣṇavas simply by smelling the aromatic tulasī mixed with saffron.

CC Madhya 18.113, Purport:

He is never Nārāyaṇa, just as a molecular portion of sunshine is never the sun itself. The living entity is nothing but a fragmental part of the Absolute Truth; therefore at no stage of perfection can a living entity become the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This Māyāvāda viewpoint is always condemned by the Vaiṣṇava school. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself protested this philosophy. When the Māyāvādīs accept sannyāsa and consider themselves Nārāyaṇa, they become so puffed up that they do not even enter the temple of Nārāyaṇa to offer respects, for they falsely think themselves Nārāyaṇa Himself. Although Māyāvādī sannyāsīs may offer respects to other sannyāsīs and address them as Nārāyaṇa, they do not go to a Nārāyaṇa temple and offer respects. These Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are always condemned and are described as demons. The Vedas clearly state that living entities are subordinate parts and parcels of the supreme. Eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān: the Supreme Being, Kṛṣṇa, maintains all living entities.

CC Madhya 19.164, Purport:

The highest achievement attained by the jñānīs, or impersonalists, is becoming one with the Supreme, generally known as mokṣa, liberation. The highest achievements of the yogīs are the eight material perfections, such as aṇimā, laghimā and prāpti. Yet these are nothing compared to the eternal bliss of the devotee who returns back to Godhead and tastes the fruit of devotional service to the lotus feet of the Lord. The material perfections, even up to the point of liberation, are very insignificant in comparison; therefore the pure devotee is never interested in such things. His only interest is in perfecting his devotional service to the Lord. The pleasure of the impersonalist, monist philosophers is condemned in the following verse, which is also found in Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Lalita-mādhava.

CC Madhya 19.216, Translation and Purport:

"A person who is devoted to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyaṇa, is not afraid of anything. Elevation to the heavenly kingdom, condemnation to hell and liberation from material bondage all appear the same to a devotee."

This verse is quoted from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (6.17.28). Elevation to the heavenly planets, liberation from material bondage, and condemnation to hell are all equal to the devotee. The devotee's only desire is to be attached to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa and to engage in His transcendental loving service.

CC Madhya 20.345, Purport:

This verse is quoted from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (12.3.52). At the present moment in Kali-yuga there are many false meditators who concoct some imaginary form and try to meditate upon it. It has become fashionable to meditate, but people know nothing about the object of meditation. That is explained here. Yad dhyāyato viṣṇum. One has to meditate upon Lord Viṣṇu or Lord Kṛṣṇa. Without referring to the śāstras, so-called meditators aim at impersonal objects. Lord Kṛṣṇa has condemned them in the Bhagavad-gītā (12.5):

kleśo ’dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām

avyaktā hi gatir duḥkhaṁ dehavadbhir avāpyate

"For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied." Not knowing how to meditate, foolish people simply suffer, and there is no benefit derived from their spiritual activities.

CC Madhya 22 Summary:

In this chapter Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu differentiates between a pure devotee and others. He also describes the characteristics of a pure devotee. A devotee's most formidable enemy is association with women in an enjoying spirit. Association with nondevotees is also condemned because it is also a formidable enemy on the path of devotional service. One has to fully surrender unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa and give up attraction for women and nondevotees.

CC Madhya 22.39, Purport:

Those who are interested in material enjoyment are known as bhukti-kāmī. One who is interested in merging into the effulgence of Brahman or perfecting the mystic yoga system is not a devotee at all. Devotees do not have such desires. However, if a karmī, jñānī or yogī somehow contacts a devotee and renders devotional service, Kṛṣṇa immediately awards him love of God and gives him shelter at His lotus feet, although he may have no idea how to develop love of Kṛṣṇa. If a person wants material profit from devotional service, Kṛṣṇa condemns such materialistic desires. To desire material opulence while engaging in devotional service is foolish. Although the person may be foolish, Kṛṣṇa, being all-intelligent, engages him in His devotional service in such a way that he gradually forgets material opulence. The point is that we should not try to exchange loving service for material prosperity. If we are actually surrendered to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, our only desire should be to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. That is pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Surrender means not that we demand something from the Lord but that we completely depend on His mercy. If Kṛṣṇa likes, He may keep His devotee in a poverty-stricken condition, or if He likes He may keep him in an opulent position. The devotee should not be concerned in either case; he should simply be very serious about trying to satisfy the Lord by rendering Him service.

CC Madhya 22.88-90, Purport:

According to Vedic civilization, one's association with women should be very much restricted. In spiritual life there are four āśramas—brahmacarya, gṛhastha, vānaprastha and sannyāsa. The brahmacārī, vānaprastha and sannyāsī are completely forbidden to associate with women. Only gṛhasthas are allowed to associate with women under certain very much restricted conditions—that is, one associates with women to propagate nice children. Other reasons for association are condemned.

CC Madhya 22.132, Purport:

However, if one goes to Mathurā-maṇḍala-bhūmi for sense gratification or to make a livelihood, he commits an offense and is condemned. Whoever does so must be penalized in the next life by becoming a hog or a monkey in Vṛndāvana-dhāma. After taking on such a body, the offender is liberated in the next life. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura remarks that residing in Vṛndāvana with a view to enjoy sense gratification surely leads a so-called devotee to a lower species.

CC Madhya 24.252, Purport:

We receive instructions in devotional service through the disciplic succession. Nārada Muni is our original guru because he is the spiritual master of Vyāsadeva. Vyāsadeva is the spiritual master of our disciplic succession; therefore we should follow in the footsteps of Nārada Muni and become pure Vaiṣṇavas. A pure Vaiṣṇava is one who has no ulterior motive. He has totally dedicated himself to the service of the Lord. He does not have material desires, and he is not interested in so-called learning and philanthropic work. The so-called learned scholars and philanthropists are actually karmīs and jñānīs, and some are actually misers engaged in sinful activity. All are condemned because they are not devotees of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

CC Madhya 24.330, Purport:

There are many caste gosvāmīs who professionally create some disciples who do not care for them or their instructions. Such spiritual masters are satisfied simply to get some material benefits from their disciples. Such a relationship is condemned by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, who calls such spiritual masters and disciples a society of cheaters and cheated. They are also called bāulas or prākṛta-sahajiyās. Their aim is to make the connection between the spiritual master and the disciple into a very cheap thing. They are not serious in wanting to understand spiritual life.

CC Madhya 25.77, Purport:

This is a quotation from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.34.9). The inhabitants of Vṛndāvana, under the leadership of Nanda Mahārāja, once went to the bank of the Sarasvatī on a pilgrimage. Nanda Mahārāja was fasting, and he lay down near the forest. At that time a serpent, who was formerly cursed by Āṅgirasa Ṛṣi, appeared. This serpent had formerly been named Sudarśana, and he had belonged to the Vidyādhara planet. However, because he joked with the ṛṣi, he was condemned to take on the body of a big snake. When this serpent attacked Nanda Mahārāja, Nanda Mahārāja began to call, "Kṛṣṇa! Help!" Kṛṣṇa immediately appeared and began to kick the serpent with His lotus feet. Due to being touched by the Lord's lotus feet, the serpent was immediately freed from the reactions of his sinful life. Being freed, he again assumed his original form of Sudarśana, the Vidyādhara.

CC Madhya 25.193, Purport:

Actually the Muslims in India did not come from the country of the Muslims, but Hindus instituted the custom that somehow or other if one contacted a Muslim, he became a Muslim. Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī were born in a high brāhmaṇa family, but because they accepted employment under a Muslim government, they were considered Muslims. Subuddhi Rāya was sprinkled with water from the pitcher of a Muslim, and consequently he was condemned to have become a Muslim. Later, Aurangzeb, the Muslim emperor, introduced a tax especially meant for Hindus. Being oppressed in the Hindu community, many low-caste Hindus preferred to become Muslims. In this way the Muslim population increased. Later the British government made it a policy to divide the Hindus and the Muslims, and thus they maintained ill feelings between them. The result was that India was divided into Pakistan and Hindustan.

CC Madhya 25.283, Purport:

The author of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, has condemned all his enemies by comparing them to envious hogs and pigs. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, which is spreading throughout the world, is being appreciated by sincere people, although they have never previously heard of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and Kṛṣṇa's pastimes. Now even the higher, priestly circles are appreciating this movement. They have concluded that this movement is very nice and that they have something to learn from it. Nonetheless, in India there are some people who say that they belong to this cult but who are actually very envious of the ācārya.

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 1.142, Translation:

“(Experiencing previous attachment to Kṛṣṇa (pūrva-rāga), Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī thought:) "Since I have heard the name of a person called Kṛṣṇa, I have practically lost My good sense. Then, there is another person who plays His flute in such a way that after I hear the vibration, intense madness arises in My heart. And again there is still another person to whom My mind becomes attached when I see His beautiful lightninglike effulgence in His picture. Therefore I think that I am greatly condemned, for I have become simultaneously attached to three persons. It would be better for Me to die because of this."

CC Antya 1.152, Translation:

"Desiring the happiness of His association and embraces, My dear friend, I disregarded even My superiors and relaxed My shyness and gravity before them. Furthermore, although you are My best friend, more dear to Me than My own life, I have given you so much trouble. Indeed, I even put aside the vow of dedication to My husband, a vow kept by the most elevated women. Oh, alas! Although He is now neglecting Me, I am so sinful that I am still living. Therefore I must condemn My so-called patience."

CC Antya 2.120, Purport:

Therefore one who is unfit should not accept the renounced order of life. One who accepts the order of sannyāsa but again becomes agitated by sensual disturbances and talks privately with women is called dharma-dhvajī or dharma-kalaṅka, which means that he brings condemnation upon the religious order. Therefore one should be extremely careful in this connection. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura explains the word markaṭa to mean "restless." A restless person cannot be steady; therefore he simply wanders about, gratifying his senses. Just to get praise from others, to get cheap adoration from his followers or people in general, such a person sometimes accepts the dress of a sannyāsī or bābājī in the renounced order, but he cannot give up desires for sense gratification, especially for the association of women. Such a person cannot make advancement in spiritual life. There are eight different kinds of sensual enjoyment with women, including talking about them and thinking about them.

CC Antya 3.51, Purport:

Unfortunately, even some so-called Vaiṣṇavas enviously refuse to cooperate with this movement but instead condemn it in so many ways. We are very sorry to say that these people try to find fault with us, being unnecessarily envious of our activities, although we are trying to the best of our ability to introduce the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement directly into the countries of the yavanas and mlecchas. Such yavanas and mlecchas are coming to us and becoming purified Vaiṣṇavas who follow in the footsteps of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. One who identifies himself as a follower of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu should feel like Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who said, ihā-sabāra kon mate ha-ibe nistāra: "How will all these yavanas be delivered?" Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was always anxious to deliver the fallen souls because their fallen condition gave Him great unhappiness. That is the platform on which one can propagate the mission of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Antya 3.56, Purport:

This refers to an instance in which a meat-eater being killed by a boar uttered the words hā rāma, hā rāma again and again at the time of his death. Since this is a quotation from the Nṛsiṁha Purāṇa, this indicates that in the purāṇic age there must also have been mlecchas and yavanas (meat-eaters), and the words hā rāma, meaning "condemned," were also uttered in those days. Thus Haridāsa Ṭhākura gives evidence that even a meat-eater who condemns something by uttering the words hā rāma gets the benefit of chanting the holy name that the devotee chants to mean "O my Lord Rāma!"

CC Antya 3.255, Translation:

“Anyone who does not float in this inundation is most condemned. Such a person cannot be delivered for millions of kalpas.

CC Antya 4.67, Translation:

“Anyone who takes to devotional service is exalted, whereas a nondevotee is always condemned and abominable. Therefore in the discharge of devotional service to the Lord, there is no consideration of the status of one's family.

CC Antya 4.75, Translation:

I am lowborn. Indeed, I am the lowest. I am condemned, for I have all the characteristics of a sinful man. If You keep me alive, what will be the profit?”

CC Antya 5 Summary:

A brāhmaṇa from Bengal composed a drama about the activities of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and went to Jagannātha Purī to show it to the associates of the Lord. When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's secretary, Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī, heard the drama, he discerned a tinge of Māyāvāda philosophy and pointed it out to the author. Although Svarūpa Dāmodara condemned the entire drama, by reference to secondary meanings of the introductory verse he nevertheless satisfied the brāhmaṇa. That brāhmaṇa poet thus became greatly obliged to Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī, renounced his family connections and stayed at Jagannātha Purī with the associates of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Antya 5.104-105, Purport:

“A poet who does not know the grammatical regulative principles, who is unfamiliar with metaphorical ornaments, especially those employed in drama, and who does not know how to present the pastimes of Lord Kṛṣṇa is condemned. Moreover, the pastimes of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu are especially difficult to understand.

CC Antya 5.118, Purport:

If one thinks that the form of Lord Jagannātha is an idol made of wood, he immediately brings ill fortune into his life. According to the direction of the Padma Purāṇa, arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhīḥ . . . yasya vā nārakī saḥ: "Anyone who considers the Deity in the temple to be made of stone or wood is a resident of hell." Thus one who thinks that the body of Lord Jagannātha is made of matter and who distinguishes between Lord Jagannātha's body and His soul is condemned, for he is an offender. A pure devotee who knows the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness makes no distinction between Lord Jagannātha and His body. He knows that they are identical, just as Lord Kṛṣṇa and His soul are one and the same. When one's eyes are purified by devotional service performed on the spiritual platform, one can actually envision Lord Jagannātha and His body as being completely spiritual.

CC Antya 5.120, Translation:

Svarūpa Dāmodara continued, “Because you have committed an offense to Lord Jagannātha and Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, you will attain a hellish destination. You do not know how to describe the Absolute Truth, but nevertheless you have tried to do so. Therefore you must be condemned.

CC Antya 5.131, Purport:

In the Bhāgavatam (7.5.30), it is said, matir na kṛṣṇe parataḥ svato vā mitho ‘bhipadyeta gṛha-vratānām: the gṛha-vratas, those who are determined to continue following the materialistic way of life, will never awaken their dormant love of Kṛṣṇa, for they hear the Bhāgavatam only to solidify their position in household life and to be happy in family affairs and sex. Condemning this process of hearing the Bhāgavatam from professionals, Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī says, yāha, bhāgavata paḍa vaiṣṇavera sthāne: "To understand the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, you must approach a self-realized Vaiṣṇava." One should rigidly avoid hearing the Bhāgavatam from a Māyāvādī or other nondevotee who simply performs a grammatical jugglery of words to twist some meaning from the text, collect money from the innocent public, and thus keep people in darkness.

CC Antya 6.128, Translation:

“I am the lowest of men, the most sinful, fallen and condemned. Nevertheless, I desire to attain shelter at the lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Antya 6.193, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu gave His verdict that those addicted to the materialistic way of life are like worms that are living in stool but cannot give it up. A gṛha-vrata, one who has decided to live in a comfortable home although it is actually miserable, is in a condemned position. Only the mercy of Kṛṣṇa can save one from such misery. Without Kṛṣṇa's mercy, one cannot get out of the filthy entanglement of materialistic life. The poor living entity cannot give up his materialistic position on his own; only when granted the special mercy of Kṛṣṇa can he give it up. Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu knew very well that Raghunātha dāsa was already liberated. Nevertheless He emphasized that Raghunātha dāsa's life of material comfort as a very rich man's son with a very beautiful wife and many servants to attend him was like a ditch of stool. The Lord thus specifically indicated that ordinary men who are very happy with material comforts and family life are in no better position than worms in stool.

CC Antya 6.197, Purport:

When a man is attached to material enjoyment, he is attached to many miserable conditions, but nevertheless he accepts his condemned position as one of happiness. Sense enjoyment is so strong for such a person that he cannot give it up, exactly as a worm in stool cannot give up the stool. From the spiritual point of view, when a person is too absorbed in material enjoyment, he is exactly like a worm in stool. Although such a position is utterly miserable to the eyes of liberated souls, the materialistic enjoyer is greatly attached to it.

CC Antya 6.200, Translation:

“By His own free will, Lord Kṛṣṇa has delivered you from such a condemned materialistic life. Therefore the glories of Lord Kṛṣṇa's causeless mercy cannot be expressed.”

CC Antya 7.134, Purport:

The paramparā system does not allow one to deviate from the commentaries of the previous ācāryas. By depending upon the previous ācāryas, one can write beautiful commentaries. However, one cannot defy the previous ācāryas. The false pride that makes one think that he can write better than the previous ācāryas will make one's comments faulty. At the present moment it has become fashionable for everyone to write in his own way, but such writing is never accepted by serious devotees. Because of false pride, every scholar and philosopher wants to exhibit his learning by interpreting the śāstras, especially the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in his own way. This system of commenting in one's own way is fully condemned by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Therefore He says, "artha-vyasta" likhana sei. Commentaries written according to one's own philosophical way are never accepted; no one will appreciate such commentaries on the revealed scriptures.

CC Antya 8.25, Translation:

"I am dying without achieving the shelter of Kṛṣṇa, and therefore I am greatly unhappy. Now this condemned foolish rascal has come to instruct me about Brahman."

CC Antya 8.56, Translation:

All the devotees condemned Rāmacandra Purī, saying, "This sinful man has come here and taken our lives."

CC Antya 9.13, Translation and Purport:

One day people suddenly came to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and informed Him, “Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka, the son of Bhavānanda Rāya, has been condemned to death by the baḍa-jānā, the eldest son of the King, and has been raised on the cāṅga.

The cāṅga was a device for killing a condemned person. It consisted of a raised platform on which the condemned was made to stand. Underneath the platform, there were stationary upright swords. The condemned man would be pushed down onto the swords, and in this way he would die. For some reason, Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka had been condemned to death and had therefore been raised upon the cāṅga.

CC Antya 9.46, Translation:

"After all," he said, “Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka is your faithful servant. To condemn a servant to death is not good behavior.

CC Antya 9.117, Purport:

When the King heard the details of Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka's unfortunate condemnation, he was induced to excuse his debt, in particular because he felt that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very sorry about this incident. The Lord did not like the idea that the money forfeited to Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka was indirectly a contribution to Him. Therefore He immediately protested.

CC Antya 11.27, Translation:

“I was born in an inferior family, and my body is most abominable. I always engage in low work. Therefore, I am the lowest, most condemned of men.

CC Antya 12.37, Purport:

"Anyone who offers respects and obeisances to the Deity while wearing garments on the upper portion of his body is condemned to be a leper for seven births."

CC Antya 14.53, Purport:

This is Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī’s lamentation for Her beloved Kṛṣṇa, who was away from home. A woman whose husband has left home and gone to a foreign land is called proṣita-bhartṛkā. Lamenting for Kṛṣṇa in the same way that such a woman laments for her husband, Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī said, "My dear friend, where is the glory of the family of Mahārāja Nanda, who wears a half-moon ornament on His head? Where is Kṛṣṇa, whose hue is like that of the indranīla jewel and who plays so nicely on His flute? Where is your friend, the best of all men, so expert in dancing in the circle of the rāsa dance? Where is He who is the real medicine to save Me from dying of heart disease? I must condemn Providence, for he has caused Me so many tribulations by separating Me from Kṛṣṇa."

CC Antya 19.35, Translation:

"My dear friend, where is Kṛṣṇa, who is like the moon rising from the ocean of Mahārāja Nanda"s dynasty? Where is Kṛṣṇa, His head decorated with a peacock feather? Where is He? Where is Kṛṣṇa, whose flute produces such a deep sound? Oh, where is Kṛṣṇa, whose bodily luster is like the luster of the blue indranīla jewel? Where is Kṛṣṇa, who is so expert in rāsa dancing? Oh, where is He, who can save My life? Kindly tell Me where to find Kṛṣṇa, the treasure of My life and best of My friends. Feeling separation from Him, I hereby condemn Providence, the shaper of My destiny.’

CC Antya 19.43, Translation:

“Kṛṣṇa is the reservoir of art and culture, and He is the panacea that saves My life. O My dear friend, since I live without Him, who is the best among My friends, I condemn the duration of My life. I think that Providence has cheated Me in many ways.

CC Antya 20.55, Translation:

Why does a woman continue to live who knows that Kṛṣṇa's heart is unhappy but who still shows her deep anger toward Him? She is interested in her own happiness. I condemn such a woman to be struck on the head with a thunderbolt, for We simply want the happiness of Kṛṣṇa.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 18:

When one does not understand Kṛṣṇa or does not engage in His transcendental loving service, it is to be understood that he is averse to studying the Vedānta and understanding the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The path of Vedānta study shown by Lord Caitanya should be followed by all. A person who is puffed up by so-called education has no humility and therefore does not seek the protection of a bona fide spiritual master. He thinks that he does not require a spiritual master and that he can achieve the highest perfection by his own efforts. Such persons are not eligible for studying the Vedānta-sūtra. Those who are under the spell of the material energy do not follow the instructions of the disciplic succession but try to manufacture something on their own. In this way they step outside the sphere of Vedānta study. A bona fide spiritual master must always condemn such independent mental speculators. If the bona fide spiritual master directly points out the foolishness of a disciple, it should not be taken wrongly.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 21:

In this way Lord Caitanya condemned attempts at indirect interpretation of the Vedānta-sūtra, and all the sannyāsīs present were struck with wonder by His explanation. After hearing the direct interpretation, one of the sannyāsīs immediately declared, "O Śrīpāda Caitanya, whatever You have explained in Your condemnation of the indirect interpretation of oṁkāra is not at all a useless argument. Still, only a fortunate person can accept Your interpretation as the right one. Actually, every one of us now knows that the interpretations given by Śaṅkara are all artificial and imaginary, but because we belong to his sect, we took it for granted that his interpretation was the right one. We shall be very glad to hear You further explain the Vedānta-sūtra by direct interpretation."

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 31:

If one wrongly thinks that the material body is as perfect as the spiritual body and thus begins to worship Kṛṣṇa by imitating the damsels of Vṛndāvana, he becomes infested with Māyāvāda (impersonal) philosophy. The impersonalists recommend a process of ahaṅgrahopāsanā, by which one worships his own body as the Supreme. Thinking in this way, such pseudo-transcendentalists dress themselves as the damsels of Vraja. Such activities are not acceptable in devotional service. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, the most authoritative ācārya in the Gauḍīya-sampradāya, has condemned these imitators. The process of transcendental realization is to follow in the footsteps of the associates of the Supreme Lord; therefore to think oneself a direct associate of the Supreme Lord is condemned. According to authorized Vaiṣṇava principles, one should follow a particular devotee and not think of himself as Kṛṣṇa's associate.

Nectar of Devotion

Nectar of Devotion Preface:

The Nectar of Devotion is not presented to condemn any way of materialistic life, but the attempt is to give information to religionists, philosophers and people in general how to love Kṛṣṇa. One may live without material discomfiture, but at the same time he should learn the art of loving Kṛṣṇa. At the present moment we are inventing so many ways to utilize our propensity to love, but factually we are missing the real point: Kṛṣṇa. We are watering all parts of the tree, but missing the tree's root. We are trying to keep our body fit by all means, but we are neglecting to supply foodstuffs to the stomach. Missing Kṛṣṇa means missing one's self also. Real self-realization and realization of Kṛṣṇa go together simultaneously. For example, seeing oneself in the morning means seeing the sunrise also; without seeing the sunshine no one can see himself. Similarly, unless one has realized Kṛṣṇa there is no question of self-realization.

Nectar of Devotion 7:

The Māyāvādīs (impersonalists) say that one may worship any form of the Lord and that it doesn't matter, because one reaches the same destination anyway. But it is clearly stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that those who are worshipers of the demigods will ultimately reach only the planets of those demigods, while those who are devotees of the Lord Himself will be promoted to the Lord's abode, the kingdom of God. So actually these persons who are worshipers of demigods have been condemned in the Gītā. It is described that due to their lusty desires they have lost their intelligence and have therefore taken to worshiping the different demigods. So in the Viṣṇu-rahasya these demigod worshipers are forcefully condemned by the statement that it is better to live with the most dangerous animals than to associate with these persons.

Nectar of Devotion 13:

In the above two verses of Rūpa Gosvāmī there are some metaphorical analogies that indirectly condemn the association of materialistic society, friendship and love. People are generally attracted to society, friendship and love, and they make elaborate arrangements and strong endeavors to develop these material contaminations. But to see the śrī-mūrtis of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa is to forget such endeavors for material association. Rūpa Gosvāmī composed his verse in such a way that he was seemingly praising the material association of friendship and love and was condemning the audience of śrī-mūrti or Govinda. This metaphorical analogy is constructed in such a way that things which seem to be praised are condemned, and things which are to be condemned are praised. The actual import of the verse is that one must see the form of Govinda if one at all wants to forget the nonsense of material friendship, love and society.

Nectar of Devotion 13:

Some scholars argue that simply by following the principles of varṇa and āśrama one can gradually rise to the perfections reached by practicing devotional service, but this argument is not accepted by the great authorities. Lord Caitanya also condemned this idea while He was talking with Rāmānanda Rāya about the gradual development of devotional service. He rejected the idea of the importance of varṇāśrama-dharma when it was put forward by Rāmānanda Rāya. He said that this advancement of varṇa and āśrama is merely external. There is a higher principle. In Bhagavad-gītā also the Lord says that one has to give up all other principles of elevation and take simply to the method of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That will help one in achieving the highest perfection of life.

Nectar of Devotion 14:

One should not give up anything which can be utilized in the service of the Lord. That is a secret of devotional service. Anything that can be utilized in advancing Kṛṣṇa consciousness and devotional service should be accepted. For instance, we are using many machines for the advancement of our present Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, machines like typewriters, dictating machines, tape recorders, microphones and airplanes. Sometimes people ask us, "Why are you utilizing material products if you condemn the advancement of material civilization?" But actually we do not condemn. We simply ask people to do whatever they are doing in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. This is the same principle on which, in Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa advised Arjuna to utilize his fighting abilities in devotional service. Similarly, we are utilizing these machines for Kṛṣṇa's service. With such sentiment for Kṛṣṇa, or Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we can accept everything. If the typewriter can be utilized for advancing our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, we must accept it. Similarly, the dictating machine or any other machine must be used. Our vision is that Kṛṣṇa is everything. Kṛṣṇa is the cause and effect, and nothing belongs to us. Kṛṣṇa's things must be used in the service of Kṛṣṇa. That is our vision.

Nectar of Devotion 21:

An example of Kṛṣṇa's equilibrium is given in the Tenth Canto, Sixteenth Chapter, verse 33, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in connection with His chastising Kāliya, the hundred-headed serpent. While Kāliya was being severely punished, all of his wives appeared before the Lord and prayed as follows: "Dear Lord, You have descended to punish all kinds of demoniac living creatures. Our husband, this Kāliya, is a greatly sinful creature, and so Your punishment for him is quite appropriate. We know that Your punishment for Your enemies and Your dealings with Your sons are both the same. We know that it is in thinking of the future welfare of this condemned creature that You have chastised him."

Nectar of Devotion 22:

In the Tenth Canto, Thirty-first Chapter, verse 15, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the gopīs lament, "My dear Kṛṣṇa, during the daytime when You go out into the forest of Vṛndāvana with Your cows, we consider one moment to be twelve years, and it is very difficult for us to pass the time. And again when You come back at the end of the day, by seeing Your beautiful face we are so much attracted that we are unable to stop looking upon You constantly. At these times, when there is occasional blinking of our eyelids, we condemn the creator, Lord Brahmā, as a dunce, because he does not know how to make perfect eyes!" In other words, the gopīs were disturbed by the blinking of their eyes, because for the moment that their eyes were closed they could not see Kṛṣṇa. This means that the gopīs' love for Kṛṣṇa was so great and ecstatic that they were disturbed by even His momentary absence. And when they saw Kṛṣṇa, they were also disturbed. This is a paradox.

Nectar of Devotion 30:

When Śiśupāla objected to the worship of Kṛṣṇa in the Rājasūya arena at a sacrifice organized by Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, Sahadeva, the younger brother of Arjuna, said, "A person who cannot tolerate the worship of Kṛṣṇa is my enemy and is possessed of a demoniac nature. Therefore I wish to strike my left foot upon his broad head, just to punish him more strongly than the wand of Yamarāja!" Then Baladeva began to lament like this: "Oh, all auspiciousness to Lord Kṛṣṇa! I am so surprised to see that the condemned descendants of the Kuru dynasty, who so unlawfully occupied the throne of the Kuru kingdom, are criticizing Kṛṣṇa with diplomatic devices. Oh, this is intolerable!" This is another instance of eagerness caused by dishonor to Kṛṣṇa.

Nectar of Devotion 31:

Sometimes ghastly activities also support strong ecstatic love for Kṛṣṇa. This state of mind is called ecstatic fearfulness under illusion. In the Tenth Canto, Twenty-third Chapter, verse 40, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there is the following statement by the brāhmaṇas who were performing sacrifices: "We have all been born into three advantageous conditions: we are in high brāhmaṇa families, we have ceremoniously received the sacred thread, and we are also properly initiated by a spiritual master. But, alas, in spite of all these advantages, we are condemned. Even our observance of brahmacarya is condemned." The brāhmaṇas thus began to condemn their own activities. They realized that in spite of being so elevated by birth, education and culture, they still were under the spell of the illusory energy. They also admitted that even great yogīs who are not devotees of the Lord are covered by the influence of material energy. This kind of hopelessness felt by the brāhmaṇas who were performing ritualistic ceremonies shows practically no attachment for Kṛṣṇa. There is another hopelessness, however, which shows attachment for Kṛṣṇa. When the bull demon attacked the damsels of Vraja, they began to cry out, "Dear Kṛṣṇa—please save us! We are now gone!" This is hopelessness with attachment for Kṛṣṇa.

Nectar of Devotion 31:

One householder devotee once said, "My Lord, I am so wretched that these two eyes are never desiring to see the glorious city of Mathurā. Therefore, my eyes are actually condemned. I am nicely educated, but my education has simply been used in government service. I have not considered formidable time, stronger than anything else, which creates and annihilates everything. To whom shall I leave all of my wealth and fortune? I am becoming older and older. What shall I do? Shall I execute devotional service from here at home? This I cannot do, because my mind is being attracted by the transcendental land of Vṛndāvana."

This is an instance of hopelessness, pride, doubt, patience, lamentation, determination and eagerness—an aggregation of seven different symptoms in ecstatic love for Kṛṣṇa.

Nectar of Devotion 38:

The great devotee Uddhava once wrote a letter to Kṛṣṇa, "My dear Kṛṣṇa, I have just finished the study of all kinds of philosophical books and Vedic verses about the goal of life, and so now I have a little reputation for my studies. But still, in spite of my reputation, my knowledge is condemned, because although enjoying the effulgence of Vedic knowledge, I could not appreciate the effulgence emanating from the nails of Your toes. Therefore, the sooner my pride and Vedic knowledge are finished, the better it will be!" This is an example of indifference.

Nectar of Devotion 43:

Similarly, mother Yaśodā felt frustration when she thought, "Although I have millions of cows, the milk of these cows could not satisfy Kṛṣṇa. Therefore let a curse be on this milk! And I also am condemned, because although I am so opulent in material prosperity, I am now unable to smell the head of my child and feed Him with my breast milk as I used to do when He was here in Vṛndāvana." This is a sign of frustration on the part of mother Yaśodā in separation from Kṛṣṇa.

Nectar of Devotion 49:

There is another quotation, from a devotee who laments as follows: "Alas, I am still trying to relish different pleasurable states from this body, which is simply some skin covering mucus, semen and blood. In this state of consciousness I am so condemned that I cannot relish the transcendental ecstasy of remembering the Supreme Personality of Godhead." In this statement there are two ecstatic loving humors, namely neutrality and ghastliness. Neutrality is taken here as the whole, whereas the ecstasy of ghastliness is the part.

Nectar of Instruction

Nectar of Instruction 1, Purport:

Of the ten types of offenses one can commit while chanting the holy name of the Lord, this offense is called nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ, committing sinful activities on the strength of chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. Similarly, certain Christians go to church to confess their sins, thinking that confessing their sins before a priest and performing some penance will relieve them from the results of their weekly sins. As soon as Saturday is over and Sunday comes, they again begin their sinful activities, expecting to be forgiven the next Saturday. This kind of prāyaścitta, or atonement, is condemned by Parīkṣit Mahārāja, the most intelligent king of his time. Śukadeva Gosvāmī, equally intelligent, as befitting the spiritual master of Mahārāja Parīkṣit, answered the King and confirmed that his statement concerning atonement was correct. A sinful activity cannot be counteracted by a pious activity. Thus real prāyaścitta, atonement, is the awakening of our dormant Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Easy Journey to Other Planets

Easy Journey to Other Planets 2:

We are only a fractional portion of all the living entities in the many universes of the material world. Those who are in the material world and material body are condemned. For example, the population in prison is condemned by the government, but their number is only a fraction of the whole population. It is not that the whole population goes to prison; some, who are disobedient, are confined in prison. Similarly, the conditioned souls within this material world are only a fraction of all the living entities in the creation of God, and because they have disobeyed God—because they did not abide by the order of Kṛṣṇa—they have been put into this material world. If one is sensible and inquisitive, he should try to understand: "Why have I been put into this conditional life? I do not wish to suffer."

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Krsna Book 7:

The Lord, out of His causeless mercy, descends to this material world and displays His activities just like an ordinary man. Unfortunately the impersonalists or the atheistic class of men consider Kṛṣṇa to be an ordinary man like themselves, and so they deride Him. This is condemned in the Bhagavad-gītā by the Lord Himself when He says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ (BG 9.11). The mūḍhas, or rascals, take Kṛṣṇa to be an ordinary man or a slightly more powerful man; out of their great misfortune, they cannot accept Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Sometimes such unfortunate persons misrepresent themselves as incarnations of Kṛṣṇa without referring to the authorized scriptures.

Krsna Book 23:

After the return of their wives from Kṛṣṇa, the brāhmaṇas engaged in the performance of sacrifices began to regret their sinful activities in refusing food to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. They could finally understand their mistake; engaged in the performance of Vedic rituals, they had neglected the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who had appeared just like an ordinary human being and asked for some food. They began to condemn themselves after seeing the faith and devotion of their wives. They regretted very much that, although their wives were elevated to the platform of pure devotional service, they themselves could not understand even a little bit of how to love and offer transcendental loving service to the Supreme Soul. They began to talk among themselves: "To hell with our being born brāhmaṇas! To hell with our learning all the Vedic literatures! To hell with our performing great sacrifices and observing all the rules and regulations! To hell with our family! To hell with our expert service in performing the rituals exactly according to the description of the scriptures! To hell with it all, for we have not developed transcendental loving service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is beyond the speculation of the mind, body and senses."

Krsna Book 34:

"My dear Lord," he said, "in my previous life I was named Vidyādhara and was known all over the world for my beauty. Because I was a celebrated personality, I used to travel all over in my airplane. While traveling, I saw a great sage named Aṅgirā. He was very ugly, and because I was very proud of my beauty, I laughed at him. Due to this sinful act, I was condemned by the great sage to assume the form of a serpent."

One should note here that before being favored by Kṛṣṇa a person is always under the modes of material nature, however elevated he may be materially. Vidyādhara was a materially elevated demigod, and he was very beautiful. He also held a great material position and was able to travel all over by airplane. Yet he was condemned to become a serpent in his next life. Any materially elevated person can be condemned to an abominable species of life if he is not careful. It is a misconception that after reaching the human body one is never degraded. Vidyādhara himself stated that even though he was a demigod he was condemned to become a serpent. But because he was touched by the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, he immediately came to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He admitted, however, that in his previous life he was actually sinful. A Kṛṣṇa conscious person knows that he is always the servant of the servant of Kṛṣṇa; he is most insignificant, and whatever good he does is by the grace of Kṛṣṇa and the spiritual master (CC Madhya 13.80).

Krsna Book 34:

In material existence, four things are very valuable: to be born in a decent family, to be very rich, to be very learned and to be very beautiful. These are considered to be material assets. Unfortunately, without Kṛṣṇa consciousness, these material assets sometimes become sources of sin and degradation. Despite Vidyādhara's being a demigod and having a beautiful body, he was condemned to the body of a snake due to pride. Therefore from this incident we can learn that those who are too proud of their material assets or who are inimical toward others are degraded to the bodies of snakes. A snake is considered to be the most cruel and envious living entity, but those who are human beings and are envious of others are considered to be even more vicious than snakes. The snake can be charmed or controlled by mantras and herbs, but a person who is envious cannot be controlled by anyone.

Krsna Book 34:

By relating the incident of Vidyādhara's deliverance, they became more attached to Kṛṣṇa. They had come to worship Lord Śiva and Ambikā, but the result was that they became more and more attached to Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, the gopīs worshiped Goddess Kātyāyanī to become more and more attached to Kṛṣṇa. It is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that persons who are attached to worshiping demigods like Lord Brahmā, Śiva, Indra and Candra for some personal benefit are less intelligent and have forgotten the real purpose of life. But the cowherd men, inhabitants of Vṛndāvana, were no ordinary men. Whatever they did, they did for Kṛṣṇa. If one worships demigods like Lord Śiva and Lord Brahmā to become more attached to Kṛṣṇa, that is approved. But if one goes to the demigods for some personal benefit, that is condemned.

Krsna Book 38:

It is clearly stated here that one should try to be recognized by the Supreme Personality of Godhead by one's service and devotion, without which the human form of life is condemned. As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, the Supreme Lord, the Personality of Godhead, is equal to everyone. He has no friends and no enemies. But He is inclined to a devotee who renders Him service with devotional love. The Bhagavad-gītā also declares that the Supreme Lord is responsive in proportion to the devotional service rendered by the devotee. Akrūra thought that Kṛṣṇa was like the desire tree in the heavenly planets, which gives fruit according to the desire of the worshiper.

Krsna Book 39:

The gopīs then began to condemn the activities of Akrūra. They stated that he was taking Kṛṣṇa, who was more dear than the dearest to them and who was the pleasure of their eyes. He was being taken from their sight without their being informed or solaced by Akrūra. Akrūra should not have been so merciless but should have taken compassion on them.

Krsna Book 53:

The system of demigod worship was directed mainly to Lord Brahmā, Lord Śiva, Lord Gaṇeśa, the sun-god and Goddess Durgā. Lord Śiva and Goddess Durgā were worshiped even by the royal families; other, minor demigods were worshiped by silly, lower-class people. As far as the brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas are concerned, they simply worship Lord Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In the Bhagavad-gītā the worship of demigods is condemned but not forbidden; there it is clearly stated that less intelligent men worship the demigods for material benefit. On the other hand, even though Rukmiṇī was the goddess of fortune, she went to the temple of Goddess Durgā because the family deity was worshiped there. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is stated that as Rukmiṇī proceeded toward the temple of Goddess Durgā, within her heart she always thought of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore when Rukmiṇī went to the temple it was not with the intention of an ordinary person, who goes to beg for material benefits; her only goal was Kṛṣṇa.

Krsna Book 53:

Ordinary people pray to Goddess Durgā for material wealth, fame, profit, strength and so on; Rukmiṇī, however, desired to have Kṛṣṇa for her husband and therefore prayed that the deity be pleased with her and bless her with that benediction. Since she desired only Kṛṣṇa, her worship of the demigods is not condemned. While Rukmiṇī was praying, she presented a variety of items before the deity, chief of which were water, different kinds of flames, incense, garments, garlands and various foods prepared with ghee, such as purīs and kachoris. She also offered fruits, sugarcane, betel nuts and spices. With great devotion, Rukmiṇī offered them to the deity according to the regulative principles, directed by the old brāhmaṇa ladies. After this ritualistic ceremony, the ladies offered the remnants of the food to Rukmiṇī as prasādam, which she accepted with great respect. Then Rukmiṇī offered her obeisances to the ladies and to Goddess Durgā. After the business of deity worship was finished, Rukmiṇī caught hold of the hand of one of her girlfriends in her own hand, which was decorated with a jeweled ring, and left the temple in the company of the others.

Krsna Book 54:

In great stupidity, he soon stood before Kṛṣṇa, telling Him repeatedly, "Stop for a minute and fight with me!" After saying this he drew his bow and directly shot three forceful arrows against Kṛṣṇa's body. Then he condemned Kṛṣṇa as the most abominable descendant of the Yadu dynasty and asked Him to stand before him for a minute so that he could teach Him a good lesson. "You are carrying away my sister just like a crow stealing clarified butter meant for use in a sacrifice. You are proud of Your military strength, but You cannot fight according to regulative principles. You have stolen my sister; now I shall relieve You of Your false prestige. You can keep my sister in Your possession only until I beat You to the ground for good with my arrows."

Krsna Book 58:

He smiled and in a grave voice said, "My dear King Nagnajit, you know very well that anyone in the princely order who is regular in his position will never ask anything from anyone, however exalted he may be. Such requests by a kṣatriya king have been deliberately forbidden by the learned Vedic followers. If a kṣatriya breaks this regulation, his action is condemned by learned scholars. But in spite of this rigid regulative principle, I am asking you for the hand of your beautiful daughter just to establish our relationship in return for your great reception of Me. You may also be pleased to be informed that in Our family tradition there is no scope for Our offering anything in exchange for accepting your daughter. We cannot pay any price you may impose for delivering her." In other words, Kṛṣṇa wanted the hand of Satyā from the King without fulfilling the condition of defeating the seven bulls.

Krsna Book 59:

Materialistic men are always interested in their own profit. For this purpose they can offer any kind of respect to anyone, but when their personal interest is over, they are no longer friends. This selfish nature is found not only among the richer class of men on this planet but even in personalities like Indra and other demigods. Too much wealth makes a man selfish. A selfish man is not prepared to take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness and is condemned by great devotees like Śukadeva Gosvāmī. In other words, possession of too many worldly riches is a disqualification for advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Krsna Book 64:

For ordinary poison there is treatment—one can be relieved from its effects—but if one drinks the poison of taking a brāhmaṇa's property, there is no remedy for the mistake. The perfect example is King Nṛga. He was very powerful and very pious, but due to the small mistake of unknowingly usurping a brāhmaṇa's cow, he was condemned to the abominable life of a lizard. Ordinary poison affects only those who drink it, and ordinary fire can be extinguished simply by pouring water on it, but the araṇi fire ignited by the spiritual potency of a brāhmaṇa who is dissatisfied can burn to ashes the whole family of a person who provokes such a brāhmaṇa. (Formerly, the brāhmaṇas used to ignite the fire of sacrifice not with matches or any other external fire but with their powerful mantras, called araṇi.) If someone even touches a brāhmaṇa's property, his family is ruined for three generations. However, if a brāhmaṇa's property is forcibly taken away, the taker's family for ten generations before him and ten generations after will be subject to ruination. On the other hand, if someone becomes a pure Vaiṣṇava, or devotee of the Lord, ten generations of his family before his birth and ten generations after will be liberated.”

Krsna Book 64:

Kumbhīpāka; not only is he put into this hell, but his family members also have to accept such a miserable condition of life. A person who takes away a brāhmaṇa's property, whether it was originally given by him or by someone else, is condemned to live for at least sixty thousand years as a miserable insect in stool. Therefore I instruct you, all My boys and relatives present here, do not, even by mistake, take the possession of a brāhmaṇa and thereby pollute your whole family. If someone even wishes to possess such property, let alone attempts to take it away by force, the duration of his life will be reduced. He will be defeated by his enemies, and after being bereft of his royal position, when he gives up his body he will become a serpent, giving trouble to all other living entities. My dear boys and relatives, I therefore advise you that even if a brāhmaṇa becomes angry with you and calls you by ill names or curses you, still you should not retaliate. On the contrary, you should smile, tolerate him and offer your respects to the brāhmaṇa. You know very well that even I Myself offer My obeisances to the brāhmaṇas with great respect three times daily. You should therefore follow My instruction and example. I shall not forgive anyone who does not follow them, and I shall punish him. You should learn from the example of King Nṛga that even if someone unknowingly usurps the property of a brāhmaṇa, he is put into a miserable condition of life.”

Krsna Book 70:

Lord Kṛṣṇa used to lie down with His sixteen thousand wives, but He would also rise from bed very early in the morning, three hours before sunrise. By nature's arrangement the crowing of the cocks warns of the brāhma-muhūrta hour. There is no need of alarm clocks: as soon as the cocks crow early in the morning, it is to be understood that it is time to rise from bed. Hearing that sound, Kṛṣṇa would get up from bed, but His rising early was not very much to the liking of His wives. The wives of Kṛṣṇa were so much attached to Him that they would lie in bed embracing Him, and as soon as the cocks crowed, Kṛṣṇa's wives would be very sorry and would immediately condemn the crowing.

Krsna Book 72:

For a great personality like you, there is no distinction between relatives and outsiders. A famous man lives forever, even after his death; therefore, any person who is completely fit and able to execute acts which will perpetuate his good name and fame and yet does not do so becomes abominable in the eyes of great persons. Such a person cannot be condemned enough, and his refusal to give charity is lamentable throughout his whole life. Your Majesty must have heard the glorious names of charitable personalities such as Hariścandra, Rantideva and Mudgala, who used to live only on grains picked up from the paddy field, and the great Mahārāja Śibi, who saved the life of a pigeon by supplying flesh from his own body. These great personalities have attained immortal fame simply by sacrificing the perishable body.” Lord Kṛṣṇa, in the garb of a brāhmaṇa, thus convinced Jarāsandha that fame is imperishable but the body is perishable. If one can attain imperishable name and fame by sacrificing his perishable body, he becomes a very respectable figure in the history of human civilization.

Krsna Book 72:

In this regard, he began to think of Bali Mahārāja. Lord Viṣṇu in the dress of a brāhmaṇa appeared as a beggar before Bali and snatched away all of his opulence and his kingdom. He did this for the benefit of Indra, who, having been defeated by Bali Mahārāja, was bereft of his kingdom. Although Bali Mahārāja was cheated, his reputation as a great devotee able to give anything and everything in charity is still glorified throughout the three worlds. Bali Mahārāja could guess that the brāhmaṇa was Lord Viṣṇu Himself and had come to him just to take away his opulent kingdom on behalf of Indra. Bali's spiritual master and family priest, Śukrācārya, repeatedly warned him about this, yet Bali did not hesitate to give in charity whatever the brāhmaṇa wanted, and at last he gave up everything to that brāhmaṇa. "It is my strong determination," thought Jarāsandha, "that if I can achieve immortal reputation by sacrificing this perishable body, I must act for that purpose; the life of a kṣatriya who does not live for the benefit of the brāhmaṇas is certainly condemned."

Krsna Book 74:

Śiśupāla went crazy because of Kṛṣṇa's being elected the supreme, first-worshiped person in that meeting, and he spoke so irresponsibly that it appeared he had lost all his good fortune. Being overcast with misfortune, Śiśupāla continued to insult Kṛṣṇa, and Lord Kṛṣṇa patiently heard him without protest. Just as a lion does not care when a flock of jackals howl, Lord Kṛṣṇa remained silent and unprovoked. Kṛṣṇa did not reply to even a single accusation made by Śiśupāla, but all the members present in the meeting, except for a few who agreed with Śiśupāla, were very much agitated because it is the duty of any respectable person not to tolerate blasphemy against God or His devotee. Some of them, who thought that they could not properly take action against Śiśupāla, left the assembly in protest, covering their ears with their hands in order not to hear further accusations. Thus they left the meeting, condemning the action of Śiśupāla. It is the Vedic injunction that whenever there is blasphemy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one must immediately leave. If he does not do so, he becomes bereft of his pious activities and is degraded to a lower condition of life.

Krsna Book 76:

Pradyumna's chariot was being driven by the son of Dāruka. According to Vedic military principles, the chariot driver and the hero on the chariot must cooperate during the fighting. As such, because it was the duty of the chariot driver to take care of the hero on the chariot during the dangerous and precarious fighting, Dāruka's son removed Pradyumna from the battlefield. Two hours later, in a quiet place, Pradyumna regained consciousness, and when he saw that he was in a place other than the battlefield, he addressed the charioteer and condemned him.

Krsna Book 82:

As far as the gopīs of Vṛndāvana were concerned, from the very beginning of their lives they did not know anything beyond Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma were their life and soul. The gopīs were so attached to Kṛṣṇa that they could not tolerate not seeing Him even momentarily when their eyelids blinked and impeded their vision. They condemned Brahmā, the creator of the body, because he foolishly made eyelids which blinked and checked their seeing Kṛṣṇa. Because they had been separated from Kṛṣṇa for so many years, the gopīs, having come along with Nanda Mahārāja and Mother Yaśodā, felt intense ecstasy upon seeing Kṛṣṇa. No one can even imagine how eager the gopīs were to see Kṛṣṇa again. As soon as Kṛṣṇa became visible to them, they took Him inside their hearts through their eyes and embraced Him to their full satisfaction. Even though they were embracing Kṛṣṇa only mentally, they became so ecstatic and overwhelmed with joy that for the time being they completely forgot themselves.

Krsna Book 84:

When the supreme authority, Lord Kṛṣṇa, was thus speaking with great gravity, all the sages and ascetics remained in dead silence. They were amazed upon hearing Him speak the absolute philosophy of life in such a concise way. Unless one is very much advanced in knowledge, one thinks his body to be his self, his family members to be his own, and the land of his birth to be worshipable. From this concept of life, the modern ideology of nationalism has sprung up. Lord Kṛṣṇa condemned such ideas, and He also condemned persons who take the trouble to go to holy places of pilgrimage just to take a bath and come back without taking the opportunity to associate with the great devotees and mahātmās living there. Such persons are compared to the most foolish animal, the ass. All those who heard considered the speech of Lord Kṛṣṇa for some time, and they concluded that Lord Kṛṣṇa was actually the Supreme Personality of Godhead playing the role of an ordinary human being, who is forced to take a certain type of body as a result of the reactions of his past deeds. He was assuming this pastime as an ordinary human simply to teach the people in general how they should live for perfection of the human mission.

Krsna Book 85:

After Lord Kṛṣṇa heard the prayers of Bali Mahārāja, He spoke as follows: “My dear King of the demons, in the millennium of Svāyambhuva Manu, the Prajāpati known as Marīci begot six sons, all demigods, in the womb of his wife, Ūrṇā. Once upon a time, Lord Brahmā became captivated by the beauty of his daughter and was following her, impelled by sex desire. At that time, these six demigods looked at the action of Lord Brahmā with abhorrence. This criticism of Brahma's action by the demigods constituted a great offense on their part, and for this reason they were condemned to take birth as the sons of the demon Hiraṇyakaśipu. These sons of Hiraṇyakaśipu were thereafter put into the womb of Mother Devakī, and as soon as they took their birth Kaṁsa killed them one after another. My dear King of the demons, Mother Devakī is very anxious to see these six dead sons again, and she is very much aggrieved on account of their early death at the hand of Kaṁsa. I know that all of them are living with you. I have decided to take them with Me to pacify My mother, Devakī. After seeing My mother, all six of these conditioned souls will be liberated, and thus in great pleasure they will be transferred to their original planet. The names of these six conditioned souls are as follows: Smara, Udgītha, Pariṣvaṅga, Pataṅga, Kṣudrabhṛt and Ghṛṇī. They will be reinstated in their former position as demigods.”

Krsna Book 87:

The most dangerous theory of the impersonalists is that when God comes as an incarnation He accepts a material body created by the three modes of material nature. This Māyāvāda theory has been condemned by Lord Caitanya as most offensive. He has said that anyone who accepts the transcendental body of the Personality of Godhead to be made of material nature commits the greatest offense at the lotus feet of Viṣṇu. Similarly, the Bhagavad-gītā also states that when the Personality of Godhead descends in a human form, only fools and rascals deride Him. This actually occurred when Lord Kṛṣṇa, Lord Rāma and Lord Caitanya moved within human society as human beings.

The personified Vedas condemn the impersonal conception as a gross misrepresentation. In the Brahma-saṁhitā, the body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is described as ānanda-cinmaya-rasa. The Supreme Personality of Godhead possesses a spiritual body, not a material body. He can enjoy anything through any part of His body, and therefore He is omnipotent.

Krsna Book 87:

Such contaminated persons, although apparently advanced in self-realization, cannot liberate even themselves, what to speak of those who follow them. Such nondevotees are compared to chained animals, for they are not able to go beyond the jurisdiction of the formalities of a certain type of faith. In the Bhagavad-gītā they are condemned as veda-vāda-rata. They cannot understand that the Vedas deal with activities of the material modes of nature—goodness, passion and ignorance. But as Lord Kṛṣṇa advised Arjuna, one has to go beyond the jurisdiction of the duties prescribed in the Vedas and take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, devotional service. The Lord says in the Bhagavad-gītā, nistrai-guṇyo bhavārjuna: "My dear Arjuna, just try to become transcendental to the Vedic rituals." This transcendental position beyond the Vedic ritualistic performances is devotional service. In the Bhagavad-gītā the Lord clearly says that persons who are engaged in His devotional service without adulteration are situated in Brahman. Actual Brahman realization means Kṛṣṇa consciousness and engagement in devotional service. The devotees are therefore real brahmacārīs because their activities are always in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, devotional service.

Krsna Book 87:

The personified Vedas continued: "Dear Lord, anyone who by Your grace has understood the glories of Your lotus feet is callous to material happiness and distress." The material pangs are inevitable as long as we exist within the material world, but a devotee does not divert his attention to such actions and reactions, which are the results of pious and impious activities. Nor is a devotee very much disturbed or pleased by praise or condemnation from people in general. A devotee is sometimes greatly praised because of his transcendental activities, and sometimes he is criticized, even though there is no reason for adverse criticism. The pure devotee, however, is always callous to praise or condemnation by ordinary people. Actually, the devotee's activities are on the transcendental plane. He is not interested in the praise or condemnation of people engaged in material activities. If the devotee can thus maintain his transcendental position, his liberation in this life and the next is guaranteed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Krsna Book 89:

Therefore, when Bhṛgu Muni reached his father, Lord Brahmā, because Bhṛgu wanted to test whether Brahmā had the quality of goodness, he purposely did not offer his respects to his father, either by offering obeisances or by offering prayers. It is the duty of a son or a disciple to offer respects and recite suitable prayers when he approaches his father or spiritual master. But Bhṛgu Muni purposely failed to offer respects, just to see Lord Brahmā’s reaction to this negligence. Lord Brahmā was very angry at his son's impudence, and he showed signs which definitely proved this to be so. He was even prepared to condemn Bhṛgu by cursing him, but because Bhṛgu was his son, Lord Brahmā controlled his anger with his great intelligence. This means that although the quality of passion was prominent in Lord Brahmā, he had the power to control it. Lord Brahmā’s anger and his controlling his anger are likened to fire and water. Water is produced from fire at the beginning of creation, but fire can be extinguished with water. Similarly, although Lord Brahmā was very angry due to his quality of passion, he could still control his passion because Bhṛgu Muni was his son.

Krsna Book 89:

He promised to protect my child when even Pradyumna, Aniruddha, Lord Balarāma and Lord Kṛṣṇa had failed. If such great personalities could not protect my child, then who can do so? I therefore condemn Arjuna for his false promise, and I also condemn his celebrated bow Gāṇḍīva and his impudence in declaring himself greater than Lord Balarāma, Lord Kṛṣṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha. How can anyone save my child, who has already been transferred to another planet? Due to sheer foolishness only, Arjuna thought he could bring back my child from another planet.”

Thus condemned by the brāhmaṇa, Arjuna empowered himself with a mystic yoga perfection so that he could travel to any planet to find the brāhmaṇa's baby. It seems that Arjuna had mastered the mystic yoga power by which yogīs can travel to any planet they desire.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

Renunciation Through Wisdom 1.1:

India's wise men of yore easily realized that the threefold miseries we humans are condemned to suffer can never be mitigated by the political condition controlling the country—whether foreign rule or freedom from it. At the dawn of modern history, the Armageddon fought in India over a political question lasted only eighteen days. On that historic battlefield the problem of human suffering and its permanent solution was discussed, and this discussion was compiled in the form of the Bhagavad-gītā.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 1.6:

It is impossible to be exempted from the adversities caused by mentally concocted beliefs. According to man-made laws, if one person murders another he is condemned to the gallows, but no action is taken against a man for killing animals. Such is not the law of providence. The law of God is such that it punishes the killers of both man and animals; both acts of murder are penalized. The atheists deny the existence of God because in this way they think they can commit sins unhindered. But all the revealed, authorized scriptures say that by killing innocent creatures, the householders commit many sins willingly or unwillingly while performing their normal daily activities. To get release from these sins, the householders are enjoined to perform certain sacrifices. Foremost of these is to eat and honor the remnants of food offered to Lord Viṣṇu. As for those selfish householders who cook food only for their own sensual pleasure and not for the service of Lord Viṣṇu, they have to suffer all the sinful reactions incurred while cooking and eating. This is the law of providence. Therefore, to get rid of these sins, the followers of the Vedic religion dedicate their household activities to Lord Viṣṇu's service.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.10:

Demigod-worshippers often try to rationalize their worship of the demigods by thinking, "I am a devotee of this demigod, so he will certainly shower his grace upon me and fulfill all my heart's desires. Hence he is indeed the Supreme Lord." But the authorized scriptures condemn such demigod-worshippers and their worship as unethical and philosophically wrong. Such worshippers cannot understand that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord, the ultimate source of all energies. The demigods are in fact manifestations of the Lord's energies, though to the illusioned demigod worshippers they appear to be the ultimate object of their worship and devotion. Those who persist in this misunderstanding will never attain the Absolute Truth. On the other hand, those who worship the demigods strictly according to scriptural injunctions quickly realize that their object of worship is subordinate to the Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa. With this realization, their illusion is destroyed and they take shelter of Lord Kṛṣṇa's lotus feet.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.3:

We strongly condemn this sort of activity. Whether directly or indirectly, Dr. Radhakrishnan has tried to circumvent the truth—that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the basis of Brahman—and in the process he has been defeated. If Dr. Radhakrishnan really accepts Lord Kṛṣṇa as the absolute God, then what inspired him to see another being within Kṛṣṇa and to write, "It is not the personal Kṛṣṇa to whom we have to give ourselves up..."?

The truth is that only those who have been blessed by the Lord can fathom the spiritual science dealing with God. Dr. Radhakrishnan's book irrefutably proves this. The Māyāvādī philosophers are big offenders to the Supreme Lord, and therefore He never manifests Himself to them. As the Lord Himself declares in the Gītā (7.25), nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-māyā samāvṛtaḥ muḍhaḥ: "I am never manifest to the foolish and unintelligent. For them I am covered by my internal potency..." All previous spiritual authorities have condemned the Māyāvādīs, but Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu has directly censured them, calling them the greatest offenders against the Supreme Lord. He said that if a person simply hears philosophy from a Māyāvādī, his spiritual life is in jeopardy.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.3:

They also do not admit that such chanting of the holy name is an offence. Of course, their biggest offence is to distinguish between Lord Kṛṣṇa and His form. Thus in the Gītā (9.11), Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself condemns these offenders:

avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā

mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam

paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto

mama bhūta-maheśvaram

Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be.

Light of the Bhagavata

Light of the Bhagavata 28, Purport:

We should always appreciate the creative energy of the Supreme Lord. Beautiful nature, even though material and therefore temporary, is always full of the glories of the creator. There is a class of philosophers who condemn the material creation as false. They say that Brahman is truth but the creation is false. This is not good. The temporary creation is also a relative truth. It is in fact the temporary picture of the eternal creation. The forgetful soul has no information of the spiritual creation, known as the sanātana-dhāma, but the temporary creation gives an idea of this original creation. The devotees of the Lord, therefore, make the best use of the bad bargain by utilizing the temporary creation in the service of the Lord.

Sri Isopanisad

Sri Isopanisad 5, Purport:

Yet when the Personality of Godhead comes before us, we neglect Him. Such foolish negligence is condemned by the Lord in the Bhagavad-gītā (9.11), where He says that the foolish deride Him, considering Him a mortal being. He is not a mortal being, nor does He come before us with a body produced of material nature. There are many so-called scholars who contend that the Lord descends in a body made of matter, just like an ordinary living being. Not knowing His inconceivable power, such foolish men place the Lord on an equal level with ordinary men.

Sri Isopanisad 9, Purport:

Such people misguide others by misinterpreting the Vedic literature. Sometimes they even condemn the Purāṇas, which are authentic Vedic explanations for laymen. The veda-vāda-ratas give their own explanations of the Vedas, neglecting the authority of great teachers (ācāryas). They also tend to raise some unscrupulous person from among themselves and present him as the leading exponent of Vedic knowledge. Such veda-vāda-ratas are especially condemned in this mantra by the very appropriate Sanskrit words vidyāyāṁ ratāḥ. Vidyāyām refers to the study of the Vedas because the Vedas are the origin of all knowledge (vidyā), and ratāḥ means "those engaged." Vidyāyāṁ ratāḥ thus means "those engaged in the study of the Vedas." The so-called students of the Vedas are condemned herein because they are ignorant of the actual purpose of the Vedas on account of their disobeying the ācāryas. Such veda-vāda-ratas search out meanings in every word of the Vedas to suit their own purposes. They do not know that the Vedic literature is a collection of extraordinary books that can be understood only through the chain of disciplic succession.

Mukunda-mala-stotra (mantras 1 to 6 only)

Mukunda-mala-stotra mantra 3, Purport:

Those who are mad after capturing and enjoying the imitation peacock, as well as those who have a pessimistic view of the imitation peacock but lack any positive information of the real peacock—both are illusioned by the modes of material nature. Those who are after the imitation peacock are the fruitive workers, and those who simply condemn the imitation peacock but are ignorant of the real peacock are the empiric philosophers. Disgusted with the mirage of happiness in the material desert, they seek to merge into voidness.

But a pure devotee does not belong to either of these two bewildered classes. Neither aspiring to enjoy the imitation peacock nor condemning it out of disgust, he seeks the real peacock. Thus he is unlike either the deluded fruitive worker or the baffled empiricist. He is above these servants of material nature because he prefers to serve the Lord, the master of material nature. He seeks the substance and does not wish to give it up. The substance is the lotus feet of Mukunda, and King Kulaśekhara, being a most intelligent devotee, prays to gain that substance and not the shadow.

Mukunda-mala-stotra mantra 3, Purport:

A pure devotee of the Lord like King Kulaśekhara does not pray to God for material wealth, followers, a beautiful wife, or any such imitation peacocks, for he knows the real value of such things. And if by circumstance he is placed in a situation where he possesses such things, he does not try to artificially get out of it by condemnation.

Mukunda-mala-stotra mantra 3, Purport:

To forget one's relationship with the Lord and thus to remain overwhelmed by material hankerings is the most condemned mode of life. This is exactly the nature of animal life. When the living entity is born in a species of lower animals, he completely forgets his relationship with the Lord and therefore remains always busy in the matter of eating, sleeping, fearing, and mating. Modern civilization promotes such a life of forgetfulness, with an improved economic condition for eating and so on. Various agents of the external energy make explicit propaganda to try to root out the very seed of divine consciousness. But this is impossible to do, because although circumstances may choke up a living being's divine consciousness for the time being, it cannot be killed. In his original identity the living entity is indestructible, and so also are his original spiritual qualities.